Saturday, February 20, 2010

Ordinary Singaporeans dream of a better quality of life not perpertual rapid GDP growth which seems to be the aim of the PAP govt:

"That is why the government decided in the past five years that it was better to grow the economy and manage the accompanying social pressures rather than slow down the economy." - MM Lee [Link]

.

MM Lee warned that if we don't work harder and keep productivity rising, the govt will have to import more foreigners to maintain GDP growth otherwise MM Lee explained our asset prices (HDB prices) will fall. Not only we have to get into high level of debt to own these HDB flats, we have to keep working harder to maintain the lofty prices. 4 decades of PAP rule and we are still on a threadmill the speed of which is increased year after year. Singaporeans work the longest hours in the world and we frequently rank no. 1 in the world for stress level[Link] yet in an interview with NatGeo, MM Lee said "the spurs are not stuck into the hide, that is their problem". Where does all this hard work, sweat and stress lead to? Our quality of life is ranked 70 by International Living[Link] out of 194. The top 5 countries are France, Australia, Switzerland, Germany and Luxemberg. Singapore is ranked below Japan, Taiwan and S. Korea. Our dream in the 80s was to achieve the Swiss standard of living....more correct to say Swiss quality of life because some people confuse standard of living with GDP.

.

What has all this got to do with Dr. Lim's dream for a more socialistic Singapore?

.

Lets look at the political system of the top 4 countries:

1. France - most of the time under socialist govts after WW2...power oscillates between right and left.

2. Australia - either under liberal democratic or labour parties after WW2.

3. Switzerland - power shared between right leaning Swiss People's Party and socialistic Social Democratic Party.

4. Germany - mostly under liberal democratic govts.

.

If you look through the list of countries with the highest quality of life, most of them are under liberal democratic, social democratic or labor parties. Liberal democracy which is the dominant form of democracy in many countries adopts many features of socialism such as independent worker's unions, social safety nets, free medical care, minimum wages etc. to narrow the inequality under a free market system where not everyone can be successful financially which may create the gap in the quality of life between the rich and the poor. This approach, called Third Way in a number of countries and by various polical parties, has been adopted into policies in last few decades as the neutral ideology stands between capitalism and classical socialism, in order to achieve the best economic outcomes and a high quality of life.

.

In Singapore, we have an elitist semi-authoritarian govt that gives welfare to itself and send its citizens to face brutal competition in their form of unbridled capitalism. Today, the only people I know in Singapore with pension and free medical care are our elites. For the elites, they have job security too in the form top jobs in GLCs. If you're cynical enough, you can say we have socialism for the elites and brutal capitalism for the ordinary citizens. Instead of welfare for the poor and safety nets for the ordinary folks, the PAP goes out of its way to direct state resources and opportunities to a small number of elites - that is elitism and the PAP justifies this by saying their talent is so rare and precious only the highest salaries can compensate for their "sacrifice". What the PAP system has created is the reverse of what social or liberal democracies has achieved - the highest income inequality in the developed world, an emerging ultra-underclass and 30% of the population earning less that $1100 a month in a country where a 3 room apartment can cost $400K. How did we get here? Singapore like many other countries would have eventually evolved a more balanced centrist neutral approach to development because in every country you will find many talented individuals willing to stand up to offer viable alternatives. In 1963, this possibility was squashed when the Internal Security Dept arrested 111 socialists and preventing them from running for coming elections. This created a climate for fear that lasted until today, and continued repression of political alternatives has led to great imbalance in policy making that has resulted in many problems faced by ordinary Singaporeans today.

.

Dr. Lim's dream of a more equal society "in which there is no exploitation of workers and the oppressed" is also the dream of many ordinary Singaporeans and this is the future we want for our children. The PAP's dream of cheaper, better and faster will never get us there. Making Singaporeans cheaper, working harder, longer ...work until you die only serves the PAP's other interests which includes the extensive network of GLCs.

.

Dr. Lim was detained for 19 years for his ideals....ideals of equality and democracy that our society needs so badly today.

.

"A Home Affairs Ministry statement on his release had said that he was arrested under the Internal Security Act for his involvement in Communist United Front (CUF) activities."

- Straits Times

If Dr. Lim was ever involved in any Communist United Front activities, they had 19 years to produce proof and put him on trial. Why didn't they? They kept him for 19 years because he refused to sign false confessions. This grave injustice is as much tragedy for Dr. Lim as it is for every other Singaporean for after 4 decades of independence we are still waiting for our "democratic society based on justice and equality".

IT IS a sweltering day as you walk by the row of repainted shophouses along Balestier Road.

As you push open the glass doors and duck inside for a welcome draught of air-conditioning, you meet a group of elderly patients waiting expectantly to see their family doctor.

The name on the door plate of his office may not ring a bell for the young but to older Singaporeans, it jumps right out of Singapore's turbulent political history: Dr Lim Hock Siew.

Enter his simply furnished room, and you see him at a desk stacked with books, stationery and newspapers. An eye chart is pasted on a glass cabinet displaying photos of him as a dashing young man.

The 79-year-old doctor, in his white long-sleeved shirt, greets you with a soft, occasionally wheezing, yet otherwise firm voice. He is not in the best of health, having suffered kidney failure last year and taken a six-month break to recuperate.

As he is undergoing dialysis three times a week, he would have preferred to extend his break except that his clinic partner, Dr Mohd Abu Bakar, 76, was overwhelmed by the patient load.

So he returned to half-day work last month, seeing around 30 patients every morning, and plans to do so as long as his health permits. 'It's kind of an ethical obligation to look after them, and I can keep myself mentally occupied,' he says.

The name of his clinic harks back to his socialist days as a political activist, first with the People's Action Party (PAP) and then with its arch rival, Barisan Sosialis. It is called Rakyat, which means 'people' in Malay. It was set up by Dr Lim and fellow Barisan Sosialis leader Dr Poh Soo Kai in 1961.

Its consultation fees are no different from other clinics' - $20 to $30. But Dr Lim charges a reduced rate for poorer patients and gives free treatment to the neediest. 'I don't deny help to those who need it,' he says.

Dr Lim's sense of compassion and empathy for the poor is well known. At a time when the unprofessional and unethical practices of some doctors are hogging the headlines, the mere mention of Dr Lim's name evokes hushed respect among his peers.

Even pro-PAP Singaporeans who would be horrified by the prospect of a Barisan Sosialis government admit to having a grudging admiration for Dr Lim as a man who has the courage of his convictions.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, once singled out Dr Lim as a politician he admired for his strength of character and ability to sacrifice for his beliefs.

Like many of his former leftist colleagues, Dr Lim feels compelled to give his side of the story before time runs out.

In recent years, a cottage industry has sprung up providing alternative histories of Singapore. Books included memoirs by former communist underground leader Fang Chuang Pi, former Barisan Sosialis leader Fong Swee Suan and former Parti Rakyat Singapura leader Said Zahari. Just three months ago, the Fajar Generation, a book on the University Socialist Club (USC) of the then-University of Malaya, was launched.

In a nutshell, Dr Lim's is a story of how an idealistic student activist joined and campaigned for the PAP in the 1950s and then fought against the ruling party in the 1960s and paid a very heavy price for his beliefs and convictions.

In 1963, he was arrested under Operation Cold Store and detained without trial for nearly 20 years before he was released in 1982.

A Home Affairs Ministry statement on his release had said that he was arrested under the Internal Security Act for his involvement in Communist United Front (CUF) activities.

Dr Lim refused to agree to any conditions that would have granted him early release and ended up in the record book as the second longest-held political prisoner after his leftist colleague Chia Thye Poh, who served 23 years.

Today, 28 years after his release, he still dreams of a socialist Singapore in which there is no exploitation of workers and the oppressed.

Political awakening

BORN in 1931 to a poor family, Dr Lim spent the 1942-45 war years helping his father sell fish in the Kandang Kerbau market. Both his parents were illiterate, but they encouraged their 10 children to study.

He was the only English-educated child in his family. As the top boy in Rangoon Road Primary School, he gained entry to Raffles Institution (RI) in 1946.

It was in RI that he picked up a book by the first prime minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru and became inspired by his socialist ideals.

Going on to study medicine at the then-University of Malaya here, Dr Lim lapped up the works of philosopher Karl Marx and economist Adam Smith, and books on the British Labour Party and Mao Zedong's communist struggle in China. His political awakening was heightened by the anti-colonial struggles raging around the world.

As he recalls, most of the university students then were indifferent to politics. They were afraid of being arrested and preferred to pursue degrees and jobs.

As one of the best and brightest of his generation, he says he felt a deep, patriotic obligation to do something for Singapore and its people in the struggle against the British colonialists ruling Singapore.

He plunged into campus activism, becoming a founding member of the anti-colonial USC, which was formed in 1953.

In 1953, Dr Lim met the young Cambridge-educated lawyer Lee Kuan Yew, who was helping to defend eight USC students charged by the British for sedition because of an article in the USC's journal, Fajar.

They won the case and Mr Lee was acclaimed as their champion. The USC rallied behind him and his associates when they set up the PAP several months after the sedition trial.

Noting that the party's original Constitution showed every mark of a socialist, anti-colonial party, Dr Lim recalls that the USC members went around persuading various groups to support the PAP. The 1955 elections saw the 24-year-old Dr Lim stumping for PAP at mass rallies.

PAP was then identified with the working class and Chinese-speaking masses. But the facade of unity maintained by the motley crew of English-educated intellectuals, Chinese-educated socialists, professionals and trade unionists could not last.

The ideological differences began to surface. One episode in 1957 that stuck in Dr Lim's memory was the plot by a group of radical unionists within the party to oust PAP strongman Ong Eng Guan and several others from the PAP leadership. They opposed Mr Ong as they viewed him as anti-left and an opportunist.

He felt then that the move was 'most unwise' as it would create party disunity and provoke a crackdown by the colonial government.

As he recollects, he and several USC members tracked down three of the prime movers - Mr Chen Say Jame, Mr Goh Boon Toh and Mr Tan Chong Kin - and sought to dissuade them. They failed. Dr Lim believes that what he did then probably aroused Mr Lee's suspicions that he was in cahoots with the leftists.

The central executive committee (CEC) elections resulted in a deadlock with six seats going to the Lee group and the other six going to the leftists. Shocked by the humiliating defeat of his associates, Mr Lee refused to take office. Dr Lim says he tried to persuade him to do so - to no avail.

As it turned out, five leftist CEC members were arrested by the Lim Yew Hock government in an anti-communist operation - and Mr Lee and company were able to regain control of the party.

In 1958, they introduced a 'cadre' system in which only appointed members could vote for the CEC. This marked the beginning of the leftists' disillusionment with Mr Lee, says Dr Lim.

Break over merger

WHEN the 1959 elections came around, Dr Lim says he and Dr Poh offered themselves 'in good faith' as PAP candidates. The answer was negative. 'He did not trust us,' says Dr Lim, referring to Mr Lee.

After the historic elections which swept the PAP to power for the first time, Dr Lim discovered that his party membership was not renewed.

From the sidelines, the government doctor witnessed the increasing acrimony between Mr Lee's group and the leftists which was to lead to what is called the Big Split of 1961.

The two factions were locked in a monumental struggle over the issues of merger with Malaya, Chinese education and the continuing detention of students and unionists.

Racked by dissension, the PAP was on the brink of collapse after losing two by-elections in Anson and Hong Lim in 1961.

Concerned over the leftist challenge within his party, Mr Lee moved a motion of confidence in the 51-seat legislative assembly. The PAP survived when 27 voted aye but 13 dissident assemblymen abstained.

Expelled from the party, the dissidents formed Barisan Sosialis with other defectors from the PAP in August 1961. The party was led by Mr Lim Chin Siong.

It was at this juncture that Dr Lim joined the new party. He had to give up a scholarship for further study and quit the civil service.

The Barisan Sosialis then, he recalls, was a very formidable organisation filled with thousands of dedicated people and 'scores upon scores of university graduates', ready to form an alternative government.

As a CEC member, Dr Lim helped to run a 'brain trust' which consulted a group of more than 50 graduates from the then-Nanyang University and University of Malaya and prepared position papers.

'We didn't have a lack of talent. We had more talent than we wanted,' he says.

In his recollection, the biggest issue that divided PAP and Barisan was merger with Malaya to form Malaysia.

Fearing that Singapore would fall to the communists, Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman had proposed on May 27, 1961 that Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei merge with Malaya to form the federation of Malaysia.

Singapore would have 15 seats in the federal house of representatives, less than what it was entitled to on the basis of population ratios, but a debatable trade-off for Singapore's exclusive autonomy over labour and education.

Although the leftists were committed to the ultimate goal of unification between the peninsula and the island, they argued that these terms for merger would make Singaporeans 'second-class citizens'.

The main sticking point, as Dr Lim points out, was that there were 'two sets of citizenship: one for Malaysians and one for Singaporeans. Singaporean citizens could not participate in Malaysian politics, much less be proportionally represented in the federation'.

The battle between both parties reached its culmination during the referendum on Sept 1, 1962, in which the PAP Government cleverly devised three alternatives for merger on varying terms with no option to say no.

PAP won by a large margin, with 71 per cent of votes in favour of its 'Alternative A' against just over 25 per cent who cast blank votes, which the Barisan called for to protest against the 'sham referendum'.

Imprisonment

THEN came the big crackdown. On Feb 2, 1963, more than 100 leftists and unionists were arrested in a massive security exercise known as Operation Cold Store, aimed at putting communists and suspected communists out of circulation.

On the mass arrests which changed the power balance in Singapore irrevocably, Dr Lim reflects: 'We lost not to Lee but to the British, who crushed the leftists for strategic, not security reasons.'

When he speaks about his nearly 20 years in detention, there is an edge to his otherwise calm voice.

Year after year, he recounts, attempts were made to break the spirit of prisoners through solitary confinement and interrogations, to make them confess their involvement in communist activities.

Dr Lim became a counsellor of sorts to the prisoners, encouraging them to talk about the physical and psychological abuse they faced during their interrogations. Some broke down in tears as they relived their experiences.

In March 1972, Dr Lim released a statement about his detention and his experience in being taken to the Internal Security Department (ISD) headquarters on Robinson Road two months earlier. He had insisted on being released, saying that 'history had vindicated my stand' that the 1963 merger would not work.

He says that ISD officers wanted him to issue a public statement that he was prepared to give up politics and devote his time to medical practice, and to express support for parliamentary democracy.

Dr Lim demanded to be released unconditionally, saying that he should not need to give up politics if there was parliamentary democracy.

He says that he was asked to 'concede something' so that his long detention could be justified. He replied that he was not interested in 'saving Mr Lee's face', and would not issue any statement to condemn his past political activities, which he said were 'legitimate and proper'.

When asked for the Government's response, a Ministry of Home Affairs spokesman says: 'Contrary to Lim Hock Siew's claims that he was an opposition politician carrying out 'legitimate and proper' activities through the democratic process, Dr Lim was in fact a prominent Communist United Front leader who, along with other CUF leaders, had planned and organised pro-communist activities in support of the Communist Party of Malaya, which employed terror and violence in their attempt to overthrow the elected governments of Singapore and Malaysia.'

In 1978, Dr Lim was released from detention and placed in Pulau Tekong under certain restrictions. A government statement had described him as a CUF member who refused to give a written undertaking that he would not be involved in communist activities and renounce the use of force to change government.

Dr Lim's view was that since he had never advocated violence, he should not have to renounce it. 'It's like making me sign a statement that I would not beat my wife,' he says.

He spent four years on Pulau Tekong before it became an army training area. There, he read medical books and became the only doctor for the few thousand villagers on the island. In appreciation, grateful villagers would ply him and his wife with durians, prawns and fish.

Release

FINALLY, on Sept 6, 1982, the Government allowed him to live on Singapore island, on the understanding that he would concentrate on his medical practice and abide by various conditions.

Asked how he coped with the long incarceration, he puts it down to an unshakeable conviction that his political stance is right.

'We were the leaders of the main opposition party, supported by the workers in Singapore, and we cannot betray our supporters. So we stuck to the bitter end. It's a matter of intellectual integrity.'

Would he shake hands with Mr Lee? His reply: 'It is for the oppressed to be magnanimous, not the oppressor. I'll forgive him and shake hands with him if he admits to his error and apologises to me and my wife.'

Dr Lim's wife Beatrice Chen, who is a nephrologist or kidney specialist, helps to treat her husband. She declines to be interviewed as she shuns publicity.

They met in 1958 when they were working together at the Singapore General Hospital, and married in 1961.

Dr Lim was detained two years later. For the next 15 years, they saw each other for half an hour each week, separated by a glass panel, and spoke by telephone.

'The fact that we can see each other is a relief,' he says. 'Our common struggle was a unifying force. We understood each other. She kept on encouraging me, giving me moral support...it was very hard for her. She's a great woman.'

The couple have one son, who is now working in the National University of Singapore. 'He was five months old when I was arrested. When I came out, my wife was in menopause. I missed the joy of bringing up my own son.'

When Dr Lim is not seeing patients, he catches up on current affairs, surfs the Internet, and reads political philosophy - currently, Bertrand Russell's A History Of Western Philosophy. He also paints as a hobby.

Step into his condominium home off Mountbatten Road, and you will be greeted by a visual feast of paintings - of scenery, flowers and women - all strictly non-political.

But one has a Chinese couplet which reads: Befriend a thousand books, and have the spine to stand by your beliefs.

105 comments:

Anonymous
said...

I always think that PAP has a very great strategy. It gets the strategy right for things that matter most. And that thing is politics which they must defintely win and win big no matter how. Once you get this right, all other things (mistakes, losses, insulting the people, talk cock, embarrassing themselves, obscene pay, sky high public housing etc) can be sorted out easily.

If only other countries can learn from PAP, they would not have so much problems.

Maybe for getting it right, they really deserve their million $ pay after all. Not any govt can easily do what the PAP did.

Getting it right for who ?Looks like it is getting it right just for the elites while the rests can suffer. Is this the right way to run a nation ? We have seen this type of system in imperial China. Any wonder that despite the Chinese being the oldest civilization, China today is still furiously trying to catch up even after 30 years of rapid economic progress. That same fate will befall Singapore. Imperial China has some sprinkings of past glory over some stretches of a long history. But over the last 200years who dominated the world ? Had there been democracy in ancient China, America and major part of the world would have belonged to Chinese people.

"Socialism for the elites and brutal capitalism for the ordinary citizens". Indeed. Our standard of living is being more affordable over the years. Things are now affordable; they are no longer cheap. Keep the PAP in power and they will ensure that things remain affordable (the most striking example is HDB flats). The worst we can do is to do nothing and leave an afforable future for our next generation.

My chums, u know i seldom come out and talk about politics. I simply dun care. All i know is government needs a crirtcal mass of businessman and rich peoples to survive. if a govt is not pro business and taxes the rich so it can create welfare, i will leave immediately.

People like Dr Lim who advocates populist policies and flirt with meddlesome unions are nothing more than communist in a socialist hide.

SIngapore is now in a totally new landscape, serving up all these histroy serve no purpose except to stir up hate in naive readers. this sounds very much like a seditious movement to me. i am sure lucky tan would have no quals leaving his family behind for 20 years so that we can enjoy such seditious entertainment on the web.

To District 10; U r nothing more than a very selfish mercenary. For $ u will do anything including selling your soul. People of ur kind will eventually destroy Singapore and the world. For your selfish and greedy needs, u plundered and robbed the world of its' resouces, u pollute and destroy the balance in nature. U want more and more but the world can only afford so much before it self-destruct. U want more and more from the average Singaporeans who have been putting in the world's longest working hours. U r the scums of this world.

PAP needs ppl like district 10 so they can survive a few more terms. Too bad their policies are creating ppl who hate them more than the so called elites that love them. If they are so smart, I can't see why they are still advocating elitism. They can only get less votes from the small group of so called "elites".

"Our quality of life is ranked 70 by International Living[Link] out of 194. The top 5 countries are France, Australia, Switzerland, Germany and Luxemberg. Singapore is ranked below Japan, Taiwan and S. Korea."

looks like i will be the only one disputing this finding.

to be fair, lets compare apple with apple. name a country without natural resources with similar land restrictions and geography can beat us?

zilch!!!!

we are NUMBER ONE i tell you. lol. put it another way, if these top 5 countries were saddled with our constrains, but keeping their political system intact, they will rank lower sooner or later. lol.

aiyoh, if lim hock siew became our lky, we probably would have stucked in the 70s and today's kids will not have progressed intellectually or with the general development in the world so as to keep this place underdeveloped and uncompetitive.

probably our homes will be cheaper but don't expect your estates to renew or grow into Duxton type housing lah.

No need to teach your children the treachery of PAP. You and your children are already experiencing it. Yet to be in its full throttle yet. Wait till the election 2010/2011, the PAP will take from your carcass what they have lost in the Great Recession.

2nd anon from the top,You should go learn some history so that you won't embarrass yourself! China is still playing catching-up now, because it was invaded by 8 western countries in 1900s which robbed it of most of its wealth. Its current catching-up status is NOT because of your accusation that it has a lousy political system.

Moreover, had there been democracy in ancient China, America and major part of the world would NOT have belonged to Chinese people, because the ancient Chinese people are peace-loving Confucian-influenced people who do not believe in committing genocide and exterminating aborigines and taking over entire continents. This has been the case in Chinese Tang Dynasty when it was at its strongest, and also in Ming Dynasty when Admiral Cheng Ho go on peace mission on his ships, NOT warships!

Thanks for letting us know that Western citizens are barbaric ass-holes who exercise their democratic voting rights to elect political leaders to carry out their democratic collective will to kill the native Americans and to take over major parts of the world.

I am happy to know that despite having invented gun powder and explosives, the Chinese dictatorial Emperor did not seek to kill off other cultures (but merely to get neighbouring countries to kow tow - a far cry from what the west did in America and "major parts of the world") and even if there were democracy in China, the Chinese people, would not have done such things as shown by the "Cheng Ho" etc evidence.

The old folks of today were young people of yesterday, and in their youth, they voted for LKY instead of standing up for justice - they turned a blind eye to the incarceration of Dr. Lim by ISD, and in doing so, they turned their back to socialism and voted for ultra capitalism. Today, they suffer from their own karma. Hahaha!

Now the question is: are the young people of today going to again turn a blind eye to the poor, the aged, the disabled, the suffering of less fortunate citizens and subscribe to LKY's zero-welfare nonsense. If so, they have no one but themselves to blame when they themselves are clearing plates and collecting cardboards when they are 80 years old.

You reap what you sow - there is karmic consequence for not standing up for justice.

The PAP government is losing a lot of support from the more informed people with a lot of conscience in their hearts.

The less informed people are still with them. Luckily for this country, the younger generation is becoming more and more politically informed, and as the common people feel the effects of the policies of the ruling government, they might just switch to the other side. Let's just wait and see. I never thought I will see this political change in my lifetime, but I think I may...

Please do not accuse me of actions that is totally beyond me,i am one man, i cannot plunder the earth and cause it to self destruct and in the process make millios suffer.

I am nothig more than a businessmn and investor. yes i do own large chunks of resources companies such as BHP, Rio and vale who strip mine the earth for profis. But lets face it, they are satisfying a demand and a good one that keep our industrials going.

As for my workers, they have a fulfilling life because they are still employed. Yes they are being drivenhad but it is through this process that they realise that hey are actually better than they thought they were.

once in a while we fire someone so the rest can be reminded that they need to perform. At the end of the day, such competitive pratice benefits everyone, from our business partners to our employees, society, employers and the human species as a whole.

Fo those who got filtered out, i am sorry but your existence is not needed unless you can contribute. we must live the Zen way. " i must be a better person today than yesterday"

if the policies put out by the pap are so well received, there will not be so much objections by the singaporeans.

without pap. it is written, singapore will not be this or that. is that so?

japan has vote in new party, has japan collapsed?

singapore should not be always viewed by its past success. moreover, those success are not by the present million-dollars leaders. just remember, the current pap drawing millions, losing billions, yet demanding its citizens to productive. what is this called! shameless act!

"Please do not accuse me of actions that is totally beyond me, i am one man, i cannot plunder the earth and cause it to self destruct and in the process make millios suffer."

Then you say this:

"once in a while we fire someone so the rest can be reminded that they need to perform. At the end of the day, such competitive pratice benefits everyone, from our business partners to our employees, society, employers and the human species as a whole."

So in one breath you are ONLY a man who can't do much damage, but yet your practices can benefit the WHOLE HUMAN SPECIES???

PAP IB prequisite:1)Must be a running dog.2)Must be shameless and claim its is a boss that can fire people when the dog have no real business or the business need to depend to the mother to spoon feed one.3)Must be a card holding PAP preferably PA Dog.4)be over 35 because must be a obedient dog.Tell you to roll over, will roll over type.tell you sit you sit type.

Also, note that he mentioned 3 recessions within 10 years and that "...we're not doing too badly..."

7:39 to 7:44, notice how he keeps harping that Temasek Holdings portfolio are transparent for three times. On this third time, he NOW declares what he has been asserting is a statement of fact. He nonchalantly addressed the accountability issue of Temasek Holding after evading it earlier by the interviewer. It has hit a nerve and he is doing his best to maintain a calm disposition. But what struck me what how he mentioned in 4:39 that this government would not protect its people and his body language does not match up when the subsequent question on accountability was asked. My concern is that when the government sees itself not needing to protect the people or provide safety humanane measures for its people, I wonder what is the role of this government. We have been harping on education and housing, but therse are basic expectations of governance. And when you pay million dollar salaries, what else have they been doing besides blaming the market? Many politicians blame the market but none of they justify it with a few million dollar salaries. If according to Tharman, everyone got it wrong, why then justifies his few million-dollar salary? These questions are never aimed at our ministers by the local media. That's why they perturbed by it and PAP has been known to reject many international interviews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie9SzMSkq5k [Part 1]

10:35 to 10:46 tells us that one of the government's real strategic advantage is our consumption tax. Yes folks, our GST is a pliable tool installed by the PAPies to buffer themselves. Not us.

When things get hard, he cites how the education system makes Singaporeans socially mobile. You can be socially mobile when there are not much opportunities on a tiny island. How many factories can you build on a tiny island at the corner of Malaysia? Moreover, what amazes me is how conveniently he plays the "non-transparency" card to his will. In Part 1, he does not readily declare the amount of the hidden reserves. In Part 2, he readily invites Temasek Holdings transparent records up for scrutiny.

Moral of the story: Don't trust millionaire 'businessmen'. LKY was a trained lawyer not a trained doctor. His motivations are different from that of a doctor who wants to cure its patients. He just want to WIN in ARGUEMENTS at all costs available to him.

Not many countries in the world will allow a plundering pap to rule for 50 years. We may not have the mineral resouces of Australia but we have a very strategic location and a population who not only produce some of the best students in maths and science but also diligently put in the world longest hours at the cheapest wages amongst the first world. That is why we ended up with over US$600 billions in hidden wealth. On a per capital basis this works out to be more than the mineral wealth of Australia. We can easily afford a free health care, free education to university and some support for the poor and the unemployed.Average Singaporeans are still waiting for LKY to deliver on his promise of a good life and a secured retirement in return for keeping them in power for so long.

Many countries don't have LKY and his pap and yet they are doing better than Singapore. If Lim Chin Siong had been the PM instead of Lee Kuan Yew, I have no doubt that Singaporeans would have a much better quality of life. We may not have all the ultra modern concret jungle but the people will be less stressful and more importanly happy.

How did China ended up being so weak as to allow itself to be plundered by the mighty West ?

Democracy in Ancient Imperial China. Tell me which planet u r on.

If there had been democracy in Ancient China, the country would not have been so backward. The country would have exploited its' invention of gun powder to conquer the world. China would have continue to dominate the world until today. The imperial rulers are more interested in their self indulgence than anything else.

U r a disgrace to Zen Buddhism.1. Zen teaches one to let go but u want more and more.2. Zen teaches u to have compassion for your fellow human beings and to help those who are down and out, u creat misery for u workers.3. Zen teaches u to seek the middle way but u over indulged.4. Zen teaches u to improve yourself as a human being, u only knows how to exploit the world natural resources and your workers to satisfy your craving for materialism.5. Please don't hide your ugly materialism behind Zen Buddhism. Zen ultimate pursuit is "NOITHINGNESS" U want more and more.

lky clings to power using all state resources. China has been sending their people here to learn how he does it. Whether s'pore a small country can be a model for china is a question. But in any country where the people have a good life both mentally and physically there must be a choice in govt. In s'pore its a one party govt., pap is fooling the people blind.

At this rate, eventually even all the reservist battalion COs also buay tahan liao. One fine day we will all get a mass open mob and be issued live ammo, grenades and artillery shells. Time to put our taxpayer-paid training into good use, create some nice fireworks and blow away people like district 10. LOL!

But this time, we have to bring in the army on the propagandistic PAP machinery which does not respect the intelligence of the voters. How can you not expect them to CONDESCEND the voters when they have plyed Singaporeans like foold for a long time? Naturally, when the PAPist turn around in their office, all they see are themselves. Who is there to disagree vehemently with them? We need to put in much needed check and balances which are long overdue.

Now, listen to LKY's stance when he argued for himself the few million-dollar salaries to mentor his PAPists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZgH3wbYH4I [0:19 to 0:33]

Who is telling the truth? It depends on what they want to present you with.

I believe if we have a family in power for too long, life will be more stressful for us.

In the first clip, the interviewer asked Tharman about who does Temasek Holding hold its accountability for losing $36 billion in a few months? Tharman replied that Ho Ching answers to the government. But the boss of that government is Ho Ching's husband, PM Lee. And the Chairman of Singapore Government Inc. is her father-in-law, MM Lee who tells his son, our PM Lee what to do. Can a father-in-law and a husband be perfectly objective when they assess her Temasek Holdings' report card? Can they, HUH? Before you guys forgot (as is the tendency of stressful and state-imposed busy Singaporeans), PM Lee was holding the finance minister portfolio while he became PM. When foreign journalists questioned whether it would be credible for the PM to be holding a Finance ministership portfolio while his wife was making Temasek Holdings' investment, he passed the portfolio to Tharman. Tharman was an Education Minister. He was made one to reestablish himself to good standing after he was charged for leaking out secrets when he was in MAS working with PM Lee...

The reason why the PAPist are up on their feet when they argue for themselves that sinful amount of million dollar salaries is because they KNOW HOW MUCH RESERVES WE HAVE AND IT'S KILLING THEM THAT THEY COULDN'T HAVE A PIECE OF IT.

Come on guys. If you have a point to make just state it. Please stop flooding my blog with meaningless comments.

All my posting says is we would have a more balanced system if we had a function democracy. I did not advocate a socialist economic system but the need to address the flaws of a capitalistic one.

As for whether we could have progressed without the PAP or the PAP way of doing things, I would say 'yes' because other east Asian countries like Taiwan, S. Korea and Japan etc have succeeded in their own right with little natural resources and completely different political systems.

I beg to differ on your take that Japan has limited resources. I'm a Singaporean working and living in Japan. Japan is somewhat rich in resources to the extent they produce their own milk, have fish farm and lots of agriculture. They also develop their own technology to solve their daily problems. Where Singapore is concern, we have nothing. The only hope we have is that our education system produces critical thinkers who are enlightened beings at the same time. Albeit this, I do not see except for a number of Singaporeans, who still are running on the rat race's treadmill.

ALSO, lately some of the posters here are polluting the commentary section. Please be more gracious. We are all human beings with limited time on earth.

You're another ass, aren't you? Your idea of evolving a system is by letting the floodgates open on cheap foreign labour and depressing salaries? Maybe your spurs are in your head and ass simultaneously at the same time. Now that the government has hasten to control the floodgates because people are upset with their extreme 1 in 3 Singaporeans is a foreigner policy, why don't you jump on them instead for changing their tack than to fuck with Lucky?

Here's a piece of Singapore advice for you: Fuck off from my elite uncaring face.

What polluting? Their comments have direct relevance to the said topic. Though they may see things in a humorous manner, it does not necessarily mean it lacks substance and likewise, your more serious comments were not rubbish either

"Now that the government has hasten to control the floodgates because people are upset with their extreme 1 in 3 Singaporeans is a foreigner policy, why don't you jump on them instead for changing their tack than to fuck with Lucky?"

Tone down for the election does not mean the gates will not be opened as wide eventually. duh.

You think the have conceded to your incessant ranting in cyberspace? Think again.

By comparison, Singapore is actually the winner in natural assets. Geo-strategic position - wanna go Indian Ocean to Pacific? Go past this island, there is no other realistic choice. Top class natural deep water port? Check. Natural sheltered location? Check. Millions of well-trained monkeys providing impex services? You name it, you got it.

Status? A first world infrastructure coupled to a third world lack of respect for basic civil niceties means one law for the elite and another for the rest. Not the place to put down roots if you can possibly avoid it. Best advice? Take their money and run.

I don't understand the statement '$ingapore does not have natural resources.' What natural resources are they referring to? Are $ingaporeans one of them? If so, do they treasure this resource?

Different industries need different resources right? So, it's not just a simple statement which can describe our situation.

Or, are they just referring to 'land' that they were interested in then. So they created this myth to justify the taking over of land from the people. But we still can find big nurseries and farms in $ingapore today.

"Status? A first world infrastructure coupled to a third world lack of respect for basic civil niceties means one law for the elite and another for the rest. Not the place to put down roots if you can possibly avoid it. Best advice? Take their money and run."

Anon 20/2/10 20:07,>If there had been democracy in Ancient China, the country would not have been so backward.

Ancient China - be it Han dynasty or Tang dynasty - was the most advanced country in the whole world!!! (At that time, Europe is still in its middle age.) In fact, except for the most recent 150 years from 1850 onwards, for the past 2000 years, China had always been the most advanced country!

So, tell me, which planet are YOU on????

> [if there were democracy, China] would have exploited its' invention of gun powder to conquer the world.

meaning, the citizens of China would have voted in a democratic election to elect leaders to use gun powder to conquer the world. Again, tell me, which planet are you living on? The Chinese people had no such barbaric intentions - the emperor had no such intention, his ministers had no such intention, his subjects i.e. the citizens had no such intention. Democratic or otherwise.

But again, thanks for letting us know that the majority of western citizens in western countries supported via democratic elections the genocide and ethnic cleansing committed by their democratic government in North/South America and Australia and other parts of the world. Thanks for letting us know that these western citizens come from lousy culture and have poor upbrining such that they democratically vote to perform such atrocious act. Indeed, Chinese culture is superior... thanks for letting us know that.

To PAP running dogs,Bringing PAP's extreme capitalism to a more balanced system where there is social welfare will NOT bankrupt the country, NOR will it cause the country to be backward and primitive.

The proof of this is that all 1st world western countries practice such a balanced system and they are doing much better than us.

While our size and natural resource differs from these countries, such differences are irrelevant to the discussion because we do have enough money to provide some welfare without bankrupting the country.

I would compare the operation cold storage just as brutal as Auschwitz and the brain behind it equivalent to Hilter. Only diffrence is Hitler failed and truth behind his deeds was exposed. In our case the leader succeeded and has successfully maintained his hold on power and has rewritten history and concealed the truth. This one also believes in the superiority of one race...his

erm for those who agree with the pap govt's way of working harder and longer hours..doesn't it strikes you that when you are always working and not living life how do you come out with products that people want?

It has swung too far to an extreme, it' time to balance the thinking back the other way round.

I shed many a tears for this manFor today in Singapore we can't find such a soulI also hope that karma will take a toll on the personWho committed such despicable act on himI cursed karma will inflict the same pain on this evil personAnd his future generations